You will recall the BBC’s coverage of the London Riots last year. Ever since, the BBC has been seeking to find “explanations” for the orgy of violence, arson and looting that defaced several of our major cities.  On Today this morning, we had ANOTHER item concerning the killing of Mark Duggan.  His Mother is still looking for “the truth” behind his death. I suppose she has ruled out him being a notorious gangster. Oddly enough, the BBC chose not to report this…

As the anniversary of the violence and looting approaches, the data reveals that 44% of riot suspects have been arrested on suspicion of committing further offences in the last 12 months. More than half of suspects who were locked up over the disorder have since been freed while thousands more who took part evaded justice.

The statistics, released under the Freedom of Information Act, showed police in Nottingham made 143 arrests following last August’s disorder, of whom 86 were charged, according to a newspaper. But in the last year, 72 of those suspects – half the total arrested – were held again for crimes including rape, arson, robbery, threats to kill and breaching bail or parole conditions, and some even arrested for multiple crimes.

In Bristol, the figures showed that 28 of the 53 held over the riots had faced further police action.

Almost as if the THUGS that took to our streets last summer needed no excuse and have continued to break the law. Not that you would ever know this by listening to the rancid pro criminal BBC.


Did you read this coverage the BBC affords the report from the The Riots, Communities and Victims Panel,  which highlights the “500,000 forgotten families” that contributed so considerably to the gaiety of street life in London and elsewhere last summer? It’s interesting to note how the BBC leads with the “poor forgotten us” angle, before then accepting that “poor parenting” played the major role. In fact the communities themselves all pointed out poor parenting as a driver of the excesses. Remarkably, when poor parenting is accepted as a primary cause, the solution is…yes, for the State to provide more help to these poor parents. I suppose it’s natural for the State Broadcaster to think it natural that the State should take on the role of mentor to those unable to parent but maybe some more forensic questions could be asked? Why are so many poor parents? How many are single parents? How have parenting skills gone missing in action? Where is the sense of responsibility certain parents should have but clearly don’t? Of course since this is the BBC, we will never get to hear them.

Moral Panics? At The BBC It’s What We Do…..

Obviously over the last few days the great and the good at the BBC have become rather unsettled as control over the urban mob violence and looting narrative began slipping through their fingers.

Shocked by the tsunami of contempt that hit them when they tried to frame the discussion in terms of “protestors”, poverty and/or race the Beeboids and their allies in the left wing media/academic cultural elite have been desperately searching for a way of regaining control of the issue by shifting the parameters of the debate.

The initial attempt was laughably unsubtle. Making much of a bevy of leading police officers, spearheaded by ACPOs big cheese Sir Hugh Orde, the aim was to portray the Cameron government as being out of touch. “Leave it to the boys in blue” became the watchword.

Unfortunately the evidence of a lack of leadership and control from the higher echelons at the Met over the first 2/3 days of mob rule in parts of London was so overwhelming that the utterances of Orde and Co. had a very hollow ring.

But, as David at noted yesterday, a new editorial line had been adopted by the BBC suits and programmed into the robotic Sarah Montague as she fed the appropriate cues to the former Director of Public Prosecutions, Lord Macdonald, over sentences handed out to looters. Naturally he came back with the appropriate response – “a collective loss of proportion” This triggered Sarah’s circuitry and produced the key phrase we shall be hearing over and over again at this weekend’s North London dinner parties.

Moral panic.

It’s all out of proportion, you see. There’s no real threat but a lot of opportunists have jumped on this bandwagon to further their own political agenda.

Moral panics allegedly arise when an event is perceived as a threat to society and its values. Those who foment the panic are said to be motivated by a fear of losing control. They therefore attempt to channel potentially disruptive energy by portraying another person or group – “folk devils” – as more of a danger than they actually are. So the Sarah Montague/BBC line appears to be that Cameron is using the riots as an opportunity to demonise the disenfranchised and divert attention from his austerity drive and, strangely enough, that was the angle recently taken by The New York Times…..surprise, surprise….

Heavy stuff, indeed…

But wait a minute – “no real threat but a bandwagon to further an agenda”……”folk devils”…..that seems to ring a bell….

Rupert Murdoch, Anders Breivik, bankers, EDL, AGW deniers, Israelis – now there is a collection of folk devils for you, always presented as the symbols of dark forces ever ready to take us back to some Thatcherite nightmare away from sweetness and light.

Moral panics? At the BBC it’s what we do…..


A B-BBC reader notes…

“Can’t give you the precise date I am afraid, but listening to Radio 3 (a saving grace generally of the BBC) one morning shortly after the rioting, a new bulletin at 8.00am or 8.30am (but not repeated) said that a report calculated that average student debt would be £59,000 (note the specious accuracy). Quite how one gets from £8,000 a year to that figure rather baffled me. The implications were clear – the nasty rich Tories had snatched away the chance of higher education from the poor blacks of Hackney etc. by imposing crippling debts. No wonder they rioted.”


The Telegraph highlights the behaviour of the BBC during the London rioting and focuses on the Corporation’s use of the term “protesters” to describe the feral scum infesting our streets. 

“Two days after a peaceful protest over the death of suspected gangster Mark Duggan in Tottenham ended, the corporation was still using the term to describe violent looters. That was despite the fact that hundreds of youths, with no connection to events in Tottenham, had since run riot across the capital. 

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, and police have all condemned the youths as “criminals” whose behaviour is “utterly appalling”. Yet senior BBC presenters and reporters on the ground yesterday continued to describe those behind the violence as “protesters”. The move sparked a wave of anger from members of the public on Twitter. Duncan Barkes wrote on the micro-blogging website: “Hello BBC. They are not protesters, are they? Rioters better description. I mean, what’s the cause for the protest?”

More linguistic support for violence, plus ca change? I mean, they call terrorists “militants” so can we be that shocked that they see mass thuggery as protest?


Well, as violent thugs (Impoverished youth with inadequate community centre provision caused by the heartless Coalition. if you work for the BBC) torch parts of our Capital city, and others join in the infernal jollity in Birmingham, Liverpool, Bristol and Nottingham, the multi-billion £££ BBC has been out to report the news. I heard Ken Livingstone on Newsnight last night and it almost made me physically nauseous. In these terrible circumstances, I find listening or viewing the BBC adds to the misery as they duck and dive around confronting the consequences of their support for multicultural uber alles. How about you?